182 Transition

[Pinecone]

All of what everyone said, plus I haven't seen this - there could be differences in how that 182 flies depending on how heavy it is. I'm basing that on Cherokee and Dakota, where it's also more HP and more weight. So W&B can be different, if the heavier plane is either really light or close to gross. Don't know if that's the same in a 182, but I bet one flies a bit differently at full gross than empty. 182 guys please jump in if there's no difference.

The difference is, the 182 is a larger plane with a larger wing.

The Dakota is a Cherokee with a larger engine.

 

[skier]

Another thing is that the 182 has a very effective seat elevation mechanism. I am the only one sitting in the left seat, so I crank it up high so the sight picture is like my Sundowner. But when the avionics techs flew it to test out their work, they cranked the seat down.

I didn't notice it much in the 172 vs. 182, but in the 172 vs. 206 I felt like the seat height really made a difference. I feel like flying it with the seat lower feels better for IFR since the gages are more in your face. At the same time, a lower seat can reduce visibility for VFR flying. Personal preference, I guess.

 

[Lawson_Stone]

The difference is, the 182 is a larger plane with a larger wing.

The Dakota is a Cherokee with a larger engine.

Not exactly true. The classic hershey-bar cherokee had a 30 foot wingspan; but the Charger/Pathfinder (precursors to the Dakota) had a 32 foot wingspan, while the Dakota stretched to 35.4 feet of wingspan. The Dakota has 170 square feet of wing over the cherokee's 160 square fee.

The Stabilator also grew. The 10 foot wide stabilator of the classic cherokee grew to 12 feet on the Charger/Pathfinder and later.

IN addition the Charger/Pathfinder/Dakota had a longer fuselage, starting in 1973 with the famous 5" second row stretch but then longer forward section to accommodate the larger engine.

Even the original PA28-235 was not just a Cherokee with a bigger engine, since the wingspan was stretched 2 more feet, but the Charger/Pathfinder and especially the Dakota were larger still.

The Dakota actually as a slightly lighter wing loading (17.6) than the Skylane at 17.8 lbs/sq.ft.

 

[Pinecone]

Thanks. Did not know that.

Actually just looked up 172 and 182, and they have the same span and wing area, according to Wikipedia.

 

[RussR]

You own the airplane. Who cares how long the transition takes? This isn’t a rental where you’re just trying to check a box. You want to be thoroughly comfortable in the airplane. So find a CFI that you like and trust, who has lots of hours in the 182, and pay him or her to help you get proficient.

It’s more than just about doing some steep turns, stalls, and landings. Take it to airports you may go to. Land on short strips. Land at high altitude airports. Learn every in and out of the avionics/autopilot/GPS.

Along the way, yes you’ll get your high performance endorsement. But don’t think of that as the end goal. The end goal should be where you feel comfortable taking your family and friends up on the type of trips you will normally do, and then some.

The CFI is a minor expense compared to owning an airplane. Don’t cheap out and just try to do the endorsement in the minimum number of hours. Train to true proficiency.

 

[Supereri]

Did you use a broker?

No, found on TAP and used a fairly local mechanic not associated with the seller.

 

[Supereri]

I'd say about 1955. On the downside, they probably smoke pretty heavily.

We still have the ashtrays, but the smoking section is now through the door and to the left.

 

[Lawson_Stone]

Thanks. Did not know that.

Actually just looked up 172 and 182, and they have the same span and wing area, according to Wikipedia.

The model evolution on the Cherokees can be mind-numbing at times. The 235 literally went through 4 stages.

 

[asicer]

Here's another thing about my 182. The weakest thing is the firewall.

Which year 182 is yours? I heard the later ones had thicker firewalls.

 

[LesGawlik]

Mine is a 1963 E. The firewall has already been replaced several years ago, well before I bought it. I don't know if the replacements are the thicker ones or the thinner one. I just know to be very careful.

 

[Supereri]

I took my first flight, as owner, in the plane with a local instructor. Had a spongy R toebrake and the GNC355 powered off. But, I couldn't have been more elated. It was a great day for flying. One thing I noticed was how easy it was to trim the plane. I generally fight the trim a bit in the 172, the 182 was so easy to trim for hands off. I could definitely feel the difference between the 172 and 182, but they are more similar than different. I'm confident on a reasonably quick transition, but prepared to let it take what it takes.

Airplane was already headed into maintenance to have the GNC355 to Dynon arinc fixed and a few other items. Now they get to fix the toe brake as well.